{"query": "Please help me summarize this government report.", "gt": "The President of the United States has available certain powers that may be exercised in the event that the nation is threatened by crisis, exigency, or emergency circumstances (other than natural disasters, war, or near-war situations). Such powers may be stated explicitly or implied by the Constitution, assumed by the Chief Executive to be permissible constitutionally, or inferred from or specified by statute. Through legislation, Congress has made a great many delegations of authority in this regard over the past 230 years.\nThere are, however, limits and restraints upon the President in his exercise of emergency powers. With the exception of the habeas corpus clause, the Constitution makes no allowance for the suspension of any of its provisions during a national emergency. Disputes over the constitutionality or legality of the exercise of emergency powers are judicially reviewable. Both the judiciary and Congress, as co-equal branches, can restrain the executive regarding emergency powers. So can public opinion. Since 1976, the President has been subject to certain procedural formalities in utilizing some statutorily delegated emergency authority.\nThe National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. \u00a7\u00a71601-1651) eliminated or modified some statutory grants of emergency authority, required the President to formally declare the existence of a national emergency and to specify what statutory authority activated by the declaration would be used, and provided Congress a means to countermand the President's declaration and the activated authority being sought. The development of this regulatory statute and subsequent declarations of national emergency are reviewed in this report.", "turbo-16k-0613_pred": "The document discusses the powers and authority granted to the President of the United States in times of crisis or emergency. These powers are not limited to military or war situations and can be derived from the Constitution or statutory law. The document traces the history of emergency powers, from their expression prior to the founding of the Republic to their increasing regulation in the modern era. It highlights key moments in the exercise of emergency powers, such as during the Civil War and World War II. The document also discusses the need for congressional oversight and regulation of emergency powers, leading to the passage of the National Emergencies Act in 1976. This act established procedures for declaring and regulating national emergencies. The document concludes by noting that further improvements and reforms in the area of emergency powers may be pursued in the future. Overall, the report provides a comprehensive overview of the history and regulation of emergency powers in the United States.", "prompt": "You are an AI visual assistant. Now you are given a very long document. Please follow the instruction after this document. These instructions may include summarizing a document, answering questions based on the document, or writing a required paragraph.Document is as follows. {} Instruction: {} The suggested output length is around 264 words. Output: ", "evaluation": "rouge"}
{"query": "Please help me summarize this government report.", "gt": "The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) requires U.S. transportation fuel to contain a minimum volume of renewable fuel. The RFS\u2014established by the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-58; EPAct05) and expanded in 2007 by the Energy Independence and Security Act (P.L. 110-140; EISA)\u2014began with 4 billion gallons of renewable fuel in 2006 and aims to ascend to 36 billion gallons in 2022. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has statutory authority to determine the volume amounts after 2022.\nThe total renewable fuel statutory target consists of both conventional biofuel and advanced biofuel. Since 2014, the total renewable fuel statutory target has not been met, with the advanced biofuel portion falling below the statutory target by a large margin since 2015. Going forward, it is unlikely that the United States will meet the total renewable fuel target as outlined in statute.\nEPA administers the RFS and is responsible for several tasks. For instance, within statutory criteria EPA evaluates which renewable fuels are eligible for the RFS program. Also, EPA establishes the amount of renewable fuel that will be required for the coming year based on fuel supply and other conditions although waiver authority in the statute allows the EPA Administrator to reduce the statutory volumes if necessary. Further, the statute requires that the EPA Administrator \"reset\" the RFS\u2014whereby the fuel volumes required for future years are modified by the Administrator if certain conditions are met. EPA monitors compliance for the RFS using a system of tradable credits referred to as renewable identification numbers (RINs).\nCongress has expressed ongoing interest in the RFS, particularly as the mandate relates to other legislative efforts (e.g., Reid Vapor Pressure requirements for ethanol-gasoline fuel blends containing greater than 10% ethanol, a national octane standard) and about oversight of the RIN market, among other things. Some assert it is time to amend or repeal the RFS, while others contend the best course of action is to maintain the status quo. For instance, some Members contend the RFS hurts consumers by creating an artificial market for ethanol. Others see ethanol as a part of a competitive energy strategy.\nCongress may also express interest in how the EPA Administrator applies the RFS \"reset\" authority. EPA reports that in early 2019 it will issue a rulemaking that proposes to modify\u2014or \"reset\"\u2014the cellulosic biofuel, advanced biofuel, and total renewable fuel volume targets for the years 2020-2022.", "turbo-16k-0613_pred": "The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) is a mandate established by Congress to ensure that U.S. transportation fuels contain a minimum volume of biofuel. The RFS requires a combination of conventional biofuel and advanced biofuel to meet the annual volume targets. However, challenges such as limited infrastructure, technology limitations, and delays in fuel pathway approvals have made it difficult to meet the required volumes. Changes in gasoline consumption and concerns about market transparency have also affected the program. The Trump Administration's small refinery exemptions have raised concerns among biofuel producers. Despite these challenges, conventional biofuel and biomass-based diesel have consistently met their targets. The implementation of the RFS has faced scrutiny, leading to litigation and debates in Congress. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for administering the program but has faced difficulties in projecting volume requirements and meeting statutory deadlines. Biofuel eligibility and compliance have also been complex issues. The production of cellulosic biofuel has fallen short, and the blend wall, which limits the amount of ethanol that can be blended into gasoline, poses a challenge. The RFS is not without its issues, and Congress has been considering whether to amend, repeal, or maintain the program while addressing concerns such as the program's purpose, design, and challenges in achieving targets.", "prompt": "You are an AI visual assistant. Now you are given a very long document. Please follow the instruction after this document. These instructions may include summarizing a document, answering questions based on the document, or writing a required paragraph.Document is as follows. {} Instruction: {} The suggested output length is around 264 words. Output: ", "evaluation": "rouge"}
{"query": "Please help me summarize this government report.", "gt": "Concurrent receipt refers to the simultaneous receipt of two types of federal monetary benefits: military retired pay and Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) disability compensation. Prior to 2004, existing laws and regulations dictated that a military retiree could not receive two payments from federal agencies for the same purpose. As a result, military retirees with physical disabilities recognized by the VA would have their military retired pay offset or reduced dollar-for-dollar by the amount of their nontaxable VA compensation. Legislative activity on the issue of concurrent receipt began in the late 1980s and culminated in the provision for Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) in the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (P.L. 107-314). Since then, Congress has added Concurrent Retirement and Disability Payments (CRDP) for those retirees with a disability rated at 50% or greater, extended concurrent receipt to additional eligible populations, and further refined and clarified the program.\nThere are two common criteria that define eligibility for concurrent receipt: (1) all recipients must be military retirees and (2) they must also be eligible for VA disability compensation. An eligible retiree cannot receive both CRDP and CRSC. The retiree must choose whichever is most financially advantageous to him or her and may change the type of benefit to be received during an annual open season.\nIn FY2017, approximately one-third of the retired military population was receiving either CRSC or CRDP at a cost of $12.4 billion. Nevertheless, there are also military retirees who receive VA disability compensation but are not eligible for concurrent receipt. Determining whether to make some or all of this population eligible for concurrent receipt remains a point of contention in Congress. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has estimated that to extend benefits to all veterans who would be eligible for both disability benefits and military retired pay would cost $30 billion from 2015 to 2024. In 2016, CBO estimated that eliminating concurrent receipt would save the government $139 billion between 2018 and 2026.", "turbo-16k-0613_pred": "This government report discusses concurrent receipt, which refers to the simultaneous receipt of both military retired pay and Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) disability compensation. The report provides an overview of the two primary components of concurrent receipt: Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) and Concurrent Retirement and Disability Payments (CRDP). It also explores the background and history of concurrent receipt, including the prohibition of dual compensation in the past. The report explains the eligibility criteria for concurrent receipt, which includes being a military retiree and also eligible for VA disability compensation. It further delves into the interaction between military retirement and VA disability compensation, as well as the different retirement options for both active duty and reserve servicemembers. The report outlines the specifics of CRSC and CRDP, and their respective eligibility requirements. It also highlights the issues and options for Congress, including the proposal to eliminate or sunset concurrent receipt programs, extending CRDP to Chapter 61 disability retirees with less than 20 years of service, extending CRDP to those with a 40% or less VA disability rating, and modifying or eliminating the special rule. Overall, the report provides a comprehensive analysis of concurrent receipt and presents various options for Congress to consider.", "prompt": "You are an AI visual assistant. Now you are given a very long document. Please follow the instruction after this document. These instructions may include summarizing a document, answering questions based on the document, or writing a required paragraph.Document is as follows. {} Instruction: {} The suggested output length is around 264 words. Output: ", "evaluation": "rouge"}
{"query": "Please help me summarize this government report.", "gt": "In recent decades, the process for appointing judges to the U.S. circuit courts of appeals and the U.S. district courts has been of continuing Senate interest. The President and the Senate share responsibility for making these appointments. Pursuant to the Constitution's Appointments Clause, the President nominates persons to fill federal judgeships, with the appointment of each nominee also requiring Senate confirmation. Although not mentioned in the Constitution, an important role is also played midway in the appointment process by the Senate Judiciary Committee.\nThe statistics presented in this report reflect congressional interest in issues related to the confirmation process for lower federal court nominees. Statistics are provided for each stage of the nomination and confirmation process\u2014from the frequency of judicial vacancies that require a presidential nomination for a judgeship to be filled to the frequency of roll call votes (rather than the use of unanimous consent or voice votes) to confirm judicial nominees. Statistics are also provided related to the length of the confirmation process itself. Additional statistics provided relate to the demographic characteristics of circuit and district court nominees confirmed by the Senate.\nThe period covered by the report, 1977 through 2018, includes every Administration from the Carter presidency to the first two years of the Trump presidency. This period also includes every Congress from the 95th (1977-1978) through the 115th (2017-2018).\nBecause the statistics presented for the Trump presidency are for the first two years of his Administration (while statistics for other presidencies reflect each President's entire Administration, whether four or eight years), the statistics presented for the Trump presidency may be different at the conclusion of his Administration.\nThis report will be next updated by CRS at the conclusion of the 116th Congress.", "turbo-16k-0613_pred": "This government report provides an overview of the nomination and confirmation process for U.S. circuit and district court judges from 1977 to 2018. It highlights the increasing interest and debate surrounding these appointments in recent decades. The report includes statistics on the number and percentage of nominees confirmed during each presidency and Congress, as well as the length of time it took for nominees to be confirmed. It also examines the ratings given by the American Bar Association to confirmed nominees and the use of roll call votes and nay votes in the confirmation process. Additionally, the report provides data on the gender and race of confirmed nominees, with a focus on increasing diversity in the federal judiciary. Overall, the report offers valuable insights into the appointment process for federal judges and the trends that have emerged over the years.", "prompt": "You are an AI visual assistant. Now you are given a very long document. Please follow the instruction after this document. These instructions may include summarizing a document, answering questions based on the document, or writing a required paragraph.Document is as follows. {} Instruction: {} The suggested output length is around 264 words. Output: ", "evaluation": "rouge"}
{"query": "Please help me summarize this government report.", "gt": "Section 420 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (P.L. 93-288, hereinafter the Stafford Act) authorizes the President to \"declare\" a Fire Management Assistance Grant (FMAG). In the interest of saving time, the authority to make the declaration has been delegated to the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA's) Regional Administrators. Once issued, the FMAG declaration authorizes various forms of federal fire suppression assistance such as the provision of equipment, personnel, and grants to state, local, and tribal governments for the control, management, and mitigation of any fire on certain public or private forest land or grassland that might become a major disaster. This federal assistance requires a cost-sharing component such that state, local, and tribal governments are responsible for 25% of the expenses.\nThis report answers frequently asked questions about FMAGs. This report will be updated as events warrant.", "turbo-16k-0613_pred": "This report provides information on Fire Management Assistance Grants (FMAGs) under Section 420 of the Stafford Act. FMAGs are federal grants that provide assistance for fire suppression activities. The report addresses frequently asked questions about the FMAG declaration process, including how requests are made, the information required in the request, and the criteria used to evaluate the need for assistance. It also explains the appeals process for denied requests and clarifies that an FMAG declaration does not exclude the possibility of an emergency or major disaster declaration. \n\nThe report further discusses the funding of FMAGs through FEMA's Disaster Relief Fund (DRF) and explains that the decision to issue an FMAG declaration is not contingent on the DRF balance. It highlights the cost-share requirements for FMAGs, with the federal government covering 75% of eligible expenses and the grantee assuming the remaining 25%. \n\nAdditionally, the report outlines the types of assistance provided under an FMAG declaration, including equipment and supplies, mobilization and demobilization, emergency work, and mitigation efforts. It also mentions that hazard mitigation funding is now available for FMAG declarations. \n\nThe report distinguishes FMAGs from other federal fire assistance programs and explains when FMAGs can be provided in conjunction with Forest Service assistance. It also clarifies that most fires on federal lands are the responsibility of the federal agency that manages the land and are not eligible for FMAG assistance, except in some cases of mixed federal and nonfederal land.", "prompt": "You are an AI visual assistant. Now you are given a very long document. Please follow the instruction after this document. These instructions may include summarizing a document, answering questions based on the document, or writing a required paragraph.Document is as follows. {} Instruction: {} The suggested output length is around 264 words. Output: ", "evaluation": "rouge"}
{"query": "Please help me summarize this government report.", "gt": "Senators and Representatives are frequently asked to support or sponsor proposals recognizing historic events and outstanding achievements by individuals or institutions. Among the various forms of recognition that Congress bestows, the Congressional Gold Medal is often considered the most distinguished. Through this venerable tradition\u2014the occasional commissioning of individually struck gold medals in its name\u2014Congress has expressed public gratitude on behalf of the nation for distinguished contributions for more than two centuries. Since 1776, this award, which initially was bestowed on military leaders, has also been given to such diverse individuals as Sir Winston Churchill and Bob Hope, George Washington and Robert Frost, Joe Louis and Mother Teresa of Calcutta.\nCongressional gold medal legislation generally has a specific format. Once a gold medal is authorized, it follows a specific process for design, minting, and awarding. This process includes consultation and recommendations by the Citizens Coinage Advisory Commission (CCAC) and the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts (CFA), pursuant to any statutory instructions, before the Secretary of the Treasury makes the final decision on a gold medal's design. Once the medal has been struck, a ceremony will often be scheduled to formally award the medal to the recipient.\nIn recent years, the number of gold medals awarded has increased, and some have expressed interest in examining the gold medal awarding process. Should Congress want to make such changes, several individual and institutional options might be available. The individual options include decisions made by Members of Congress as to what individual or groups might be honored; potential specification of gold medal design elements; and where gold medals for groups might be housed once the award is made. The institutional options could include House, Senate, or committee rules for the consideration of gold medal legislation and whether statutory standards on the number of gold medals issued per year or per Congress might be established for gold medals.", "turbo-16k-0613_pred": "The report provides an overview of the history and practices surrounding the Congressional Gold Medal, a prestigious award given by Congress to individuals and groups to express public gratitude for their distinguished contributions. The tradition of awarding gold medals dates back to the late 1700s, with the first medals authorized by the Continental Congress. These medals were seen as a way to honor and preserve the memory of illustrious characters and important events.\n\nIn the early days, gold medals were primarily awarded for distinguished military achievements, while silver and bronze medals were given for lesser accomplishments. However, only the gold medal has been continuously awarded to the present day. Over time, the scope of the gold medal expanded to include recognition in various fields such as the arts, athletics, diplomacy, science, and civil rights activism.\n\nThe process of authorizing a Congressional Gold Medal involves introducing a bill in Congress, which is referred to the House Committee on Financial Services or the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. The legislation typically includes findings that summarize the historical significance of the recipient, specifications for the design and striking of the medal, authorization to mint and sell duplicate medals, and certification that the medals are minted according to existing requirements.\n\nThe report also discusses the individual considerations and institutional considerations that Members of Congress need to take into account when proposing or considering Congressional Gold Medal legislation. This includes determining whom or what to recognize, specifying design elements, and establishing standards for issuing gold medals.\n\nIn conclusion, Congressional Gold Medals hold significant importance in honoring national achievements, and their issuance has increased over the years. As Congress continues to consider and award future gold medals, various factors will need to be considered to ensure the integrity and value of this prestigious award.", "prompt": "You are an AI visual assistant. Now you are given a very long document. Please follow the instruction after this document. These instructions may include summarizing a document, answering questions based on the document, or writing a required paragraph.Document is as follows. {} Instruction: {} The suggested output length is around 264 words. Output: ", "evaluation": "rouge"}
{"query": "Please help me summarize this government report.", "gt": "House rules govern the length of time legislative measures must be available to Members before being considered on the floor. For measures reported from committee, a draft of the committee report must have been available for 72 hours. Conference reports must also have been available for 72 hours and special rules for considering measures for one legislative day. Bills and joint resolutions that have not been reported by committee, and therefore are not accompanied by a written report, may also not be considered on the House floor unless the measure has been available for 72 hours. Proposed committee reports, unreported bills and joint resolutions, conference reports, and joint explanatory statements are considered available under these rules if they are publicly available in electronic form on a website designated by the Committee on House Administration for this purpose, http://docs.house.gov.\nThe House has several means by which it can choose to waive these availability requirements and call up, debate, and vote on a measure in a single calendar day even if the text of the measure was not made available prior to consideration. These include (1) considering a measure under the suspension of the rules procedure or by unanimous consent, (2) adopting a special rule that waives the 72-hour requirement, (3) adopting a special rule that waives the one-day requirement for another special rule, and (4) convening a second legislative day on the same calendar day. Waiving availability requirements allows the House to act quickly when necessary, such as near the end of a session.", "turbo-16k-0613_pred": "This government report discusses the availability requirements in the House of Representatives when it comes to reviewing legislative measures. The document explains that different House rules establish availability requirements for reported bills and resolutions, unreported bills and joint resolutions, conference committee reports, and special rules. The rules state that draft committee reports and unreported bills and joint resolutions must be publicly available in electronic form at a designated location for them to be considered available. The document also mentions that conference reports and accompanying joint explanatory statements need to be available in the Congressional Record or at the designated location for 72 hours before they can be considered. The report explains that the House can waive these availability requirements by unanimous consent, a two-thirds vote to suspend the rules, or a simple majority vote. It also discusses how the House can create or extend a legislative day to consider a measure and how special rules can be used to waive the availability requirements. Finally, the report mentions the use of special rules near the end of a session to waive availability requirements and the arguments both in favor and against these end-of-session resolutions. Overall, this report provides a comprehensive overview of the availability requirements in the House of Representatives.", "prompt": "You are an AI visual assistant. Now you are given a very long document. Please follow the instruction after this document. These instructions may include summarizing a document, answering questions based on the document, or writing a required paragraph.Document is as follows. {} Instruction: {} The suggested output length is around 264 words. Output: ", "evaluation": "rouge"}
{"query": "Please help me summarize this government report.", "gt": "Although states have a great deal of autonomy in how they establish and run their unemployment insurance programs, federal law requires states to pay Unemployment Compensation (UC) benefits promptly as provided under state law. During some recessions, current taxes and reserve balances may be insufficient to cover state obligations for UC benefits. States may borrow funds from the federal loan account within the Unemployment Trust Fund (UTF) to meet UC benefit obligations.\nThis report summarizes how insolvent states may borrow funds from the UTF loan account to meet their UC benefit obligations. It includes the manner in which states must repay federal UTF loans. It also provides details on how the UTF loans may trigger potential interest accrual and explains the timetable for increased net Federal Unemployment Taxes Act (FUTA) taxes if the funds are not repaid promptly.\nOutstanding loans listed by state may be found at the Department of Labor's (DOL's) website, https://oui.doleta.gov/unemploy/budget.asp.", "turbo-16k-0613_pred": "Unemployment Compensation (UC) is a program that provides benefits to unemployed workers. It is funded through federal and state payroll taxes under the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA) and State Unemployment Tax Acts (SUTA). When the economy is growing, UC program revenue increases while spending on benefits decreases, creating a surplus fund for use during economic downturns. States levy their own payroll taxes (SUTA) to fund UC benefits, and if they have insufficient funds during a recession, they can borrow from the federal loan account within the Unemployment Trust Fund (UTF). If states choose to borrow from outside sources, they may face higher interest rates and fees. Repayment of loans is required, and failure to repay can lead to increased federal taxes. The FUTA tax rate is 6.0%, but it can be reduced to as low as 0.6% for employers in states with approved programs and no outstanding federal loans. States are legally required to promptly pay UC benefits even if their trust fund account is depleted, and they have strong incentives to maintain adequate funds to avoid needing loans. Interest charges are imposed on unpaid loans, and states can receive interest-free loans under certain conditions. Table 2 shows the status of outstanding state loans and whether states were subject to credit reductions.", "prompt": "You are an AI visual assistant. Now you are given a very long document. Please follow the instruction after this document. These instructions may include summarizing a document, answering questions based on the document, or writing a required paragraph.Document is as follows. {} Instruction: {} The suggested output length is around 264 words. Output: ", "evaluation": "rouge"}
{"query": "Please help me summarize this government report.", "gt": "Since the 1950s and the creation of the first federal student aid programs, one aim of federal higher education policy has been to promote access to postsecondary education, particularly for students with financial need. In recent years, the federal government has annually made available more than $100 billion in federal grants, loans, and work-study funds to millions of students to help cover the cost of higher education. As Congress continues to focus on expanding access to postsecondary education through federal student aid policies, understanding various characteristics of the population enrolling in postsecondary education may be useful for policy deliberations.\nThis report focuses on the income of the undergraduate student population. It analyzes (1) how the income distribution of the undergraduate population has changed over time; (2) the relationship between student income and certain student demographics, such as race and dependency status; and (3) how the income distribution of the undergraduate population compares with that of the population of persons who do not have a postsecondary degree. Major findings presented in this report include the following:\nThe number and proportion of low-income students has increased in more recent years, even as total enrollment has decreased. Low-income student enrollment has increased at a faster pace than the nation's population of low-income persons. The majority of students enrolling in postsecondary education have incomes below 200% of the poverty guidelines. Independent undergraduate students who have sometimes been labeled as \"non-traditional\" constitute a large portion of enrolled postsecondary students and tend to have lower income than more \"traditional\" students. Nonwhite students account for nearly 50% of the undergraduate student population, and they tend to have lower income than white students. The majority of low-income students attend community colleges and a disproportionately high share attend private for-profit institutions.\nThe changing composition of the student population could have implications for federal policies designed to promote access to postsecondary education. In particular, policymakers face consideration of whether federal policies could play a role in encouraging students at various income levels to enroll at the highest performing types of schools. Policymakers also face consideration of the extent to which Higher Education Act programs are designed to support the success of non-traditional and minority students.", "turbo-16k-0613_pred": "This government report examines the income distribution of undergraduate students in postsecondary education in the United States. The report uses data from the National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS) and the Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement (CPS ASEC) to analyze the income characteristics of the student population and compare it to the national population. The findings show that low-income students make up a significant portion of the undergraduate population, with more than 50% of students having incomes below 200% of the poverty guidelines. The report also highlights the differences in income distribution across various student demographics such as race, dependency status, and type of institution attended. It suggests that federal policies have been effective at promoting access to postsecondary education for low-income students but raises concerns about the declining enrollment of middle and upper-income students. The report concludes by discussing the implications of the changing composition of the student population for policies aimed at promoting access and completion in higher education.", "prompt": "You are an AI visual assistant. Now you are given a very long document. Please follow the instruction after this document. These instructions may include summarizing a document, answering questions based on the document, or writing a required paragraph.Document is as follows. {} Instruction: {} The suggested output length is around 264 words. Output: ", "evaluation": "rouge"}
{"query": "Please help me summarize this government report.", "gt": "Money-bail systems allow criminal defendants to avoid prison while awaiting trial by posting a bond set by a fee schedule. The impact of money-bail systems on indigent criminal defendants, however, has prompted legislative interest in and legal challenges to such systems, particularly when the bail does not reflect an individual's specific circumstances, such as potential flight risk or public safety. Critics of money-bail systems assert that fee schedules unduly burden indigent defendants, while supporters argue that fee schedules provide uniformity and ensure that defendants appear at trial.\nSeveral states and municipalities have reformed their bail systems. Voters in New Mexico approved a constitutional amendment that allows judges to deny bail to defendants considered exceptionally dangerous, but otherwise permits pretrial release of nondangerous indigent offenders who cannot make bail. Other jurisdictions have altered or eliminated their money-bail systems in recent years, including cities in Alabama, Georgia, and Maryland.\nCourts have heard legal challenges regarding whether state or local money-bail systems comport with the Constitution's Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses. The Supreme Court has established that the Constitution provides certain protections to indigents during sentencing and postconviction, including ensuring that an indigent's failure to pay a fine cannot result in an automatic revocation of probation or imprisonment beyond the statutory maximum term. The Court, however, has not addressed these rights in the bail context. Applying the rational basis standard, some courts have found money-bail systems that reasonably ensure a defendant's subsequent court appearance to be constitutional. Other courts have indicated that bail systems that detain indigent criminal defendants pretrial, without considering their ability to pay, may be unconstitutional.", "turbo-16k-0613_pred": "This government report discusses the constitutionality and impact of money-bail systems in the United States. Money-bail systems allow defendants to avoid jail while awaiting trial by posting a bond according to a fee schedule. Critics argue that these systems disproportionately burden indigent defendants, who may struggle to pay bail fees, while supporters argue that fee schedules ensure defendants' appearance in court and treat them uniformly. Several states have considered proposals to eliminate or alter their money-bail systems, with some opting to use individualized risk assessment tools instead. The report also explores the constitutional considerations related to bail and indigence. The Eighth Amendment prohibits excessive bail, but it does not guarantee an absolute right to bail. Due process requirements demand that pretrial detention and bail are implemented in a fair and nonarbitrary manner. The report concludes by stating that while the Supreme Court has recognized the rights of indigents in sentencing and post-conviction contexts, it has not specifically addressed such rights in the bail context. Lower courts are divided on whether money-bail systems discriminate against indigent defendants, with some finding them suspect and others upholding them as related to legitimate government interests.", "prompt": "You are an AI visual assistant. Now you are given a very long document. Please follow the instruction after this document. These instructions may include summarizing a document, answering questions based on the document, or writing a required paragraph.Document is as follows. {} Instruction: {} The suggested output length is around 264 words. Output: ", "evaluation": "rouge"}
{"query": "Please help me summarize this government report.", "gt": "This report focuses on previous activity in Congress regarding high profile incidents of sexual assault in the military during the summer 2013 through 2016. Included are separate sections on the official responses related to these incidents by the Department of Defense (DOD), the Obama Administration, and Congress including legislation during the 113th (2013-2014) Congress and 114th Congress (2015-2016). The last section is a resource guide for sources in this report and related materials on sexual assault and prevention during this period. This report will not be updated and supersedes CRS Report R43168, Military Sexual Assault: Chronology of Activity in Congress and Related Resources.\nFor current information regarding Congress and issues on sexual assault in the military, see CRS Report R44944, Military Sexual Assault: A Framework for Congressional Oversight, by Kristy N. Kamarck and Barbara Salazar Torreon. For legislative initiatives in the 115th Congress, see CRS Report R44923, FY2018 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Issues, by Kristy N. Kamarck, Lawrence Kapp, and Barbara Salazar Torreon and CRS Report R45343, FY2019 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Issues, by Bryce H. P. Mendez et al.", "turbo-16k-0613_pred": "Beginning in the summer of 2013 and continuing through 2016, there were numerous reports in the media on sexual assault incidents in the U.S. armed services. In response to these incidents and the public outcry, the Department of Defense (DOD), the Obama Administration, and Congress took actions to address the issue. This report provides a comprehensive chronology of the official activities and legislative actions taken in response to incidents of military sexual assault. It is divided into three sections: the DOD and the Obama Administration's actions, congressional action, and legislation in the 113th (2013-2014) and 114th (2015-2016) Congresses. The report also includes a resources section with related articles, hearings, and reports.", "prompt": "You are an AI visual assistant. Now you are given a very long document. Please follow the instruction after this document. These instructions may include summarizing a document, answering questions based on the document, or writing a required paragraph.Document is as follows. {} Instruction: {} The suggested output length is around 264 words. Output: ", "evaluation": "rouge"}
{"query": "Please help me summarize this government report.", "gt": "The Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA) is a federal workers' compensation program that covers certain private-sector maritime workers. Firms that employ these workers are required to purchase workers' compensation or self-insure and are responsible for providing medical and disability benefits to covered workers who are injured or become ill on the job and survivors benefits to the families of covered workers who die on the job. The LHWCA is administered by the Department of Labor (DOL), and all benefit costs are paid by employers and their insurance carriers. In 2016, more than $1.4 billion in LHWCA benefits were paid to beneficiaries.\nCongress has extended the LHWCA provisions to cover workers outside of the maritime industry, such as overseas government contractors and civilian employees of military post exchanges. As part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), persons who repair recreational vessels of any size were added to the LHWCA exemption list. In 2011, the DOL implemented this provision; since then, those regulations have proven controversial and numerous bills have been introduced to modify the regulatory definition to increase the number of workers exempted from the LHWCA.\nThe LHWCA pays for all medical care associated with a covered injury or illness. Disability benefits are based on a worker's pre-injury wage, and, unlike comparable state workers' compensation benefits, are adjusted annually to reflect national wage growth.", "turbo-16k-0613_pred": "The Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA) is a workers' compensation system in the United States that requires private-sector firms to provide coverage for their employees engaged in maritime occupations. The LHWCA program is administered by the Department of Labor (DOL), but benefits are mainly paid through private insurers or self-insured firms. Workers' compensation in the United States is primarily mandated by state laws, with the federal government only administering programs for federal employees and certain private-sector workers. Injured or ill workers covered by the LHWCA are provided with medical and disability benefits, and survivors of deceased workers also receive benefits. The LHWCA paid approximately $1.41 billion in cash and medical benefits in 2016. The LHWCA covers various firms involved in maritime activities on or adjacent to navigable waters, and it includes workers like longshore workers and harbor workers. Certain workers, as specified by the LHWCA, are excluded from coverage. Amendments to the LHWCA have extended coverage to occupations outside the original scope of the law. Employers can choose to purchase private insurance or self-insure to provide workers' compensation coverage. The DOL operates the Special Fund to provide benefits in cases where responsible employers or insurance carriers cannot pay. The LHWCA also provides vocational rehabilitation services. Disabilities resulting from covered injuries or illnesses are eligible for different types of benefits, including total, partial, and permanent partial disability benefits. Survivors of workers who die on the job receive cash benefits, including a burial and funeral allowance. The LHWCA claims process involves informal conferences, formal hearings, and possible appeals.", "prompt": "You are an AI visual assistant. Now you are given a very long document. Please follow the instruction after this document. These instructions may include summarizing a document, answering questions based on the document, or writing a required paragraph.Document is as follows. {} Instruction: {} The suggested output length is around 264 words. Output: ", "evaluation": "rouge"}
{"query": "Please help me summarize this government report.", "gt": "The United States Fire Administration (USFA)\u2014which includes the National Fire Academy (NFA)\u2014is currently housed within the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The objective of the USFA is to significantly reduce the nation's loss of life from fire, while also achieving a reduction in property loss and nonfatal injury due to fire.\nThe Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019 (P.L. 116-6) provided $45.679 million for USFA, including $1.5 million in the FEMA Procurement, Construction, and Improvements account for the National Emergency Training Center. For FY2020, the Administration requested $46.605 million, which includes $1.5 million transferred from the Procurement, Construction, and Improvements account for NETC campus renovations. The budget proposal would be a $1 million increase over the FY2019 level; the increase would fund further improvements to NETC facilities. The budget proposal does not include funding for State Fire Training Assistance.\nOn January 3, 2018, the President signed the United States Fire Administration, AFG, and SAFER Program Reauthorization Act of 2017 (P.L. 115-98). P.L. 115-98 extends the USFA authorization through FY2023. The authorization levels are the same as in the previous authorization: $76,490,890 each year for FY2017 through FY2023.\nMeanwhile, concerns over the federal budget deficit could impact future funding levels for the USFA. Debate over the USFA budget has focused on whether the USFA is receiving an appropriate level of funding to accomplish its mission, given that appropriations for USFA have consistently been well below the agency's authorized level. Additionally, an ongoing issue is the viability and status of the USFA and the National Fire Academy within the Department of Homeland Security.", "turbo-16k-0613_pred": "The United States Fire Administration (USFA) is a part of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) under the Department of Homeland Security. Its main objective is to reduce fire-related deaths, injuries, and property losses in the United States. Despite improvements in fire safety over the past 25 years, the US still has a high fire death rate compared to other industrialized countries. In 2015, there were over 1.3 million fires, resulting in 3,280 civilian deaths and $14.3 billion in property loss. The USFA was established in 1974 and is located in Emmitsburg, MD. It collects data on fire incidents and provides national analysis of the fire problem. The USFA also conducts public education programs, provides training for fire service personnel, and conducts research to improve fire and life safety. The USFA receives its annual funding through the House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Homeland Security. In FY2017, the USFA received $44 million. For FY2018, the Administration requested $43.41 million, and the final appropriation was $44.397 million. For FY2019, the USFA received $45.679 million, and for FY2020, the Administration requested $46.605 million. The USFA has been authorized through FY2023. The Assistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG) Program, also known as the FIRE Act grant program, provides federal grants to local fire departments and EMS organizations for equipment, training, and other firefighter-related needs. The USFA has been involved in administering the AFG program, and efforts have been made to enhance collaboration between USFA and FEMA's Grant Programs Directorate. The 116th Congress may consider funding levels for the USFA, expanding its role, and the position of USFA and the National Fire Academy within DHS.", "prompt": "You are an AI visual assistant. Now you are given a very long document. Please follow the instruction after this document. These instructions may include summarizing a document, answering questions based on the document, or writing a required paragraph.Document is as follows. {} Instruction: {} The suggested output length is around 264 words. Output: ", "evaluation": "rouge"}
